The following notes were taken from the Thursday, May 9th, 2024 Governance User Group (GUG) meeting. They form a summary of the items discussed, and are not intended to be a full transcript, and were taken from my chat log and the video by Pantera – my thanks to her as always for providing it.
Meeting Overview
- The Governance User Group to a forum for the discussion of topics relating to safety and security in Second Life. Please note this does not include:
- Direct discussion of filed Abuse Reports the outcome of investigations, or potential actions taken in abuse cases; this includes providing feedback on reports and / or addressing questions relating to hypothetical situations.
- Matters related to copied or stolen content, DMCA or copyright issues / filings.
- These meetings are conducted (as a rule):
- Every second Thursday of the month, starting at 14:00 SLT.
- May be a mixture of voice and text.
- Are chaired by Keira and Tommy Linden.
- Held at this location.
- They are open to anyone with a concern / interest in the above topics, and form one of a series of regular / semi-regular User Group meetings conducted by Linden Lab.
- Dates and times of all current meetings can be found on the Second Life Public Calendar, and descriptions of meetings are defined on the SL wiki.
General Notes for May 9th Meeting
- The Thursday May 9th, meeting was subject to a special discussion on changes to the Second Life Child Avatar Policy, as announced within an official blog post issued a few hours ahead of the meeting.
- This meeting was entirely in text, and these notes are drawn from both Pantera’s video (embedded below), and copies of the chat transcripts forwarded to me be several attendees – my sincere thanks to all who did so.
- No: this is not a full transcript of the meeting. However, I have tried to include all relevant comments made by Keira and Tommy Linden.
Initial Meeting Discussion
The role of Governance and the GUG Meetings
- Tommy Linden provided an overview of the Governance Team and their responsibilities, primarily for those who may not be fully aware of the team’s role:
- Handling Abuse Reports (and appeals).
- Handling reports of fraud reports.
- Account security (with a recommendation that users should use multi-factor authentication (MFA) for added account security).
- Marketplace moderation and forum moderation.
- Keira Linden then added:
Going forward with these monthly meetings we intend to increase Resident education as it pertains to account security, as well as being more transparent with the community on Abuse actions by publishing some meaningful data around abuse reports. We will also be regularly reviewing and updating trust and safety policies, procedures, and tools based on evolving threats.
What I mean by that [“meaningful data”], is that we intend to publish data pertaining to abuse issues as were able to.
- It was further noted that LL is currently in the process now of evaluating several different products and systems to help with proactive moderation.
- No specific details were made available, but it was indicated that the tools being considered “will help the team identify potential violations of the” Terms of Service or Community Standards.
- This drew speculation that AI tool will be used and questions asked on real-time chat monitoring. Keira responded by stating (Video: 18:42):
We are not going to discuss the specifics around the tools at this time. As more decisions are made we may be able to offer more information. Right now, we are looking at a number of different tools that have different capabilities.
Abuse Reports
- Tommy expanded on how the team approaches such investigations, starting with the initial Abuse Report (which needs to be correctly completed (please see my Abuse Report tutorial on this, to which he and other members of the Governance Team contributed for notes on completing ARs), and to which he added:
Each report is thoroughly investigated as we understands that there are always 3 sides to every story. While we always try to take an educational approach first when responding to reports, there are some issues that are so severe that it will result in a termination instead. We also want to clear up the misconception that the submitting of multiple reports from Residents, also known as AR parties, does not mean that action will be taken, or even be taken in a quicker timeline.
- On the appeals process, he stated:
Appeals are thoroughly investigated by someone other than the initial agent in the investigation. This reviewer treats this as a new investigation and again looks at all the criteria available before making their decision. In addition, as part of the full review process, the appeal does get reviewed by a committee before a final decision is made. We don’t take action before completing our investigation, unless we need to hold an account temporarily for its own security. Action is only taken after an investigation is completed. Without disclosing how our internal tools work, we have taken every measure possible to remove any potential bias in every investigation.
Child Avatar Policy
Background
- Enhancing Our World Together: Important Updates for the Second Life Community – Linden Lab official blog post, May 2nd 2024.
- Official Child Avatar Policy
- FAQ relating to the above (and a work-in-progress at the time of writing).
- Second Life Maturity Ratings.
- Please also refer to the official General Discussion section of the official forums for multiple discussions on this topic, and specifically, this thread.
Meeting Discussion and Quotes
This limits of this discussion were set by Keira Linden at the opening on the meeting (Video 5:47):
We understand many of you have come here to potentially protest, or debate the changes we have made to our child avatar policy, and while we understand that not everyone agrees with the changes, we are not here today to debate the policy. That said, I am completely open to feedback. If you have feedback regarding the policy, we encourage you to submit a support ticket, or use our feedback portal.
General Notes
- The primary forum thread on the subject is being read comprehensibly by Tommy Linden, and as a result, the FAQ is being updated to provide further information and clarification. As such, it should be seen as a living reference document.
Modesty Layers for Child Avatars
- New images have been added to the FAQ to illustrate what LL is looking for with regards to child avatars.
- It was noted that there have been requests on the forums to have the [presumably the upper] back of the modesty layer for female avatars be optional, and Keira indicated that might be possible, but is currently subject to review and approval.
- Whatever approach is used – (e.g. baked into the skin at creation or otherwise), the modesty layer cannot be intentionally removed / ignored (or, presumably, intentionally masked). Keira (video: 52:20 and 52:51):
Cannot be removed means just that. It cannot be removed by any means. If a new [skin] is applied then it will need to have the modesty layers.
- In terms of how the modesty layers should work, Keira stated (video: 28:24):
The other concern in regards to the modesty layer is how it will impact existing content. To be clear, we are requiring skin sellers to have the areas shown in the images use a modesty layer on the skin files. However, for existing content, bake layers and alphas can be a viable temporary solution but we would STRONGLY encourage everyone to move to a more permanent solution.
- Keira confirmed that modesty layers will be required by any avatar “presenting as under the age of 18”, and there will be a period of adjustment (video: 28:58-30:44 – comments concatenated here for ease of reading):
We understand there is some confusion regarding the age range that would be expected to follow the new policy, so we want to clarify that anyone presenting under the age of 18 will be required to follow the policy in regards to child avatars. Regarding enforcement of these new policies, I do know that there will be an adjustment period We fully intend to take an educate and inform approach to these issues, and not actively seeking to strong arm enforce these unless there is an egregious violation of the terms of service, such as sexualized age play.
General Comments / Concerns
- In response to questions related to the use of furry avatars (e.g. will cubs her required to have modesty layers), anime characters (who can appear to be under 18 even when not), petite avatars, Keira Linden stated (video: 31:36-35:01) – comments from each concatenated for ease of reading):
I can assure that appearance alone is not the deciding factor in most cases, when we are looking at abuse reports.
As was mentioned before, we do have an appeals process that I believe allows for many evaluations of that appeal. If that proves to be insufficient, we will re-evaluate the process. There are some things that we cannot change, but when it comes to processes and policies I believe that those require frequent review and tweaking to keep up with current Internet trends and community use.
With Tommy further adding:
As someone who has worked on the Governance team for the past 12 years both as an agent and the leader of the team, I can say that we have very rarely taken action on just appearance alone, there has almost always been additional factors leading to action.
For those asking about clarification on age, regardless of your gender, whether or not you are a furry, or participating in the anime community, if you are presenting as under the age of 18, that is required to follow our policy regarding child avatars.
- (video from 35:02 onwards): Various concerns and questions were raised, relating to (responses quoted, where given):
- The use of non-human avatars, and the use of modesty layers.
- The requirement for female babies to have a “bra” modesty layer potentially sexualising them.
- Whether anyone in an under-5 avatar can requires the “bra” modesty cover when just the “panties” cover should suffice.
Keira Linden (video: 48:57) :
I hear you all on the modesty layer on infants, and is something I am willing to consider, but I can’t promise that any change will be made at this time.
-
- Had the fact that by enforcing baked modestly layers in skins potentially “breaks” the baby / young child skin market (which is currently unisex).
- Can the technical aspects of the modesty layer can be discussed in more detail between creators and the Lab.
Keira (video: 41:15):
I am open to discussing it further. Feel free to email me or send in a support ticket to my attention.
-
- How is “presenting as” treated? Many have Profiles which present as children, but adopt adult avatars for certain aspects of their SL. Are they allowed to visit with friends who have homes on A-rated regions, or A-rated combat regions? If they have a Profile referencing being as a child and are reported for being child whilst visiting an A-rated region, how would the report be evaluated? What happens if someone as a child avatar inadvertently teleports to an A-rated region and gets reported?
Kiera (video: 43:38, 44:16 and 48:02 – concatenated into a single response for readability):
You can still go there just not as a child avatar If you are reported and you are in an adult avatar that is how we will evaluate the report. If a report is made we do look at the intent of the Resident. We can tell if someone popped into a region then immediately left.
-
- Are adult bodies such as Maitreya allowed for teens (Maitreya has some geometry in the groin that cant be removed); does the need for child avatars to be “G-rated” mean they are unable to purchase / wear M-rated items (jewellery, hair, etc.)?
- Questions passed as unanswered will hopefully be addressed through other means.
† The header images included in these summaries are not intended to represent anything discussed at the meetings; they are simply here to avoid a repeated image of a rooftop of people every week. They are taken from my list of region visits, with a link to the post for those interested.
Inara Pey: Living in a Modemworld 